MeowChowMeow

[TheGrifter]

I've been reading a lot of the Unl posts I'd like to make an observation.

Most of the posts & replies include a lot of PT info, villian is a 26/3, aggression factor etc. And also a lot of flawed strategy advice and play.

At this level you guys need to concentrate on learning the fundamentals of the game. This is infinitely more important to your success than your opponents stats.

Most of what poker tracker can tell you can be derived in a couple of orbits of play, and you get the advantage of observing how an opponent is playing RIGHT NOW as opposed to his "mean" style.

Just my thoughts, anyone agree, disagree?

[Sean Fraley]

I agree.

The HUD stats help keep some info handy, but in no way take the place of real reads, especially when an opponent has deviated from his/her norm. In general, I think that a lot of player's game would improve if they played fewer tables and spent less time relying on data averages instead of their own observation. As to whether or not their hourly rate would improve, I don't know.

A caveat to this is that as far as posting on this forum, posting the stats is a convenient shorthand way of at least giving us a basic outline of the opponent. While it would be better to actually post a more detailed and tangible read, the stats are a quick way of giving us a starting point as to what kind of villain is the subject of a post.

[Gelford]

You are right that real reads are better than pt stats, but ....

.... the thing is that when you are new, you are simply not capable of making reads, and cutting down on tables is not going to improve this, you simply do not have the experience to make anything of anything, so PT are kind of a surrogate read until that day, where you can read.

The only thing imo that teaches you to read is playing playing and playing, get 100K of hands under your belt. Sure try to make reads while doing this, but do be disappointed if you simply cant read.

After that you are starting to get consious of stats and that stats can change during a session, image plays etc etc.


I am not convinced that playing fewer tables will speed up this process, on the contrary .... as long as you try to be concentrated as you play and don't open so many tables that you can't keep up.



Etc etc ... it depends as they say

[avfletch]

I think stats are over used/abused but they really help in certain circumstances. One of the main places I find it improves my win rate is dodgy the set mining nits when I'm multi-tabling. When playing several tables without a HUD I find it can be hard to keep track of exactly who you don't have any reads on because they are new or because they aren't playing (an important read in itself).

With PT + PAHUD it doesn't take long for them to be picked out and I can get out of their way when they start blasting.

[matrix]

[ QUOTE ]
I've been reading a lot of the Unl posts I'd like to make an observation.

Most of the posts & replies include ... a lot of flawed strategy advice and play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to agree.

Much more helpful than this post would be you spotting "flawed advice" and correcting it - and pointing out why it is flawed tho.

I agree with Gelford as well - uNL players by and large can't read hands - put them on one table for 5 orbits and they still wouldn't be able to read hands giving every player their full attention.

reading people takes experience (or natural latent talent) - there is no way to get experience without playing lots of hands - for some people they do better playing with 6 tables others can't handle more than 2 very well (I'm one of the latter) - it's best I think to find the number of tables you are most comfortable with and playplayplayplay - get that experience - go away after you play and then review your games for at least half as long as you spent playing - go and watch other people you think are good play and try and put people on hands there as well etc etc..

[TheGrifter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've been reading a lot of the Unl posts I'd like to make an observation.

Most of the posts & replies include ... a lot of flawed strategy advice and play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to agree.

Much more helpful than this post would be you spotting "flawed advice" and correcting it - and pointing out why it is flawed tho.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree and replied to a bunch of uNL posts.

[boycalledroy]

I use the PokerTracker information just for pre-flop alone. I like to know what % of hands are being limped and raised. It gives me more of a feel for them preflop and postflop I go with my instincs/reads.

[matrix]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've been reading a lot of the Unl posts I'd like to make an observation.

Most of the posts & replies include ... a lot of flawed strategy advice and play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to agree.

Much more helpful than this post would be you spotting "flawed advice" and correcting it - and pointing out why it is flawed tho.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree and replied to a bunch of uNL posts.

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/heart.gif nice work /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Sean Fraley]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree and replied to a bunch of uNL posts.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thank you. I got in a bit of a tiff last night in one of the posts over how some of the more experienced posters react to the less than stellar advice offered up by less experience players like myself. While some of the players in this forum (Matrix being a case in point) are quite good and spend a great deal of time helping us newbies out, sometimes it appears that the blind lead the blind in this forum.

[Check_The_Nuts]

Grifter - I think a lot of players don't play a widely varied style. I doubt one day a lot of people play 30/20/3 or whatever then the next they play 15/14/5 (which are two completely different styles, completely diff. concepts, etc.). I do have a tendancy to play both, but I dunno if this is typical. I agree that using mean stats on a player that is often switching styles is somewhat useless. I often wonder how off ppl's reads on me are at UB cuz my styles vary so much.

[Gelford]

As stated in a recent HSNL post: The clueless should stop trying to post here and learn from the clueless or something similar.

This might sound arrogant, but there is a point to this. The 2+2 forums are not a coaching site as such, there are plenty of poker coaches and if you like one, they start at 25-50$ an hour and go up to 500$ an hour.

The thing is that this is an inspirational place, it's function is to make you think about poker and the thing is, that if you had like one or a small group of experienced posters, then all there would happen is that you would ask a question and then get an answer and it kinda ends there.

Poker comes from within, basically what you are looking to build up is not some sort of list with readymade answers, but an understanding of what is going on and a system that is coherent, something that makes sense. And yes the blind lead the blind, but this allows for the blind to interact, to have a discussion. Actually to argue and get to explore poker, and that is actually a good thing.

And yes we have matrix that gives very good advice and right now in many ways stands heads and shoulders above the rest of uNL and you will always have somebody like that, our mods for example, so the blind are not on their own really.

But yes there is a lot of semipar advice here, but well I remember myself about a year ago having played around a year at that time and actually beating uNL convincing enough, but ... err ... while I thought I was good at this game, I really didn't understand much. Much of my own progress was giving bad advice and being desputed by other posters. The bad advice is not that bad a thing, as long as the discussion it generates is alive and people question it. And I believe that that is the case at the 2+2 forums.

[Marshall28]

ive been saying similar things for months in individual threads here. there are quite a few players that seem to know all the odds and go all out in terms of pokertracker stats and such, yet have no idea what they are doing fundamentally. i start giving them advice, then they throw back at me a bunch of numbers from this and that without understanding whats actually going on in the hand or whatever. i think if most players would take their focus off the numbers so much and think more about the meaning derived from villains reactions and such, they would get a lot better a lot quicker.

and yes, less tables will help players to read immensely better. i dont even know how a lot of players do 8 table and still get results. i used to do it a lot, til i realized that there is just too much going on in order to focus on that many players and situations. i win more playing 4 tables at a time than i did playing 8 in the same period of time.

[Gelford]

Different strokes for different people, I do not think I'd be able to read the way I do now, if I hadn't 8 tabled the 11s-33s for half a year 6 hours a day.

[Marshall28]

my general contention is just that it takes a pretty extraordinary level of concentration and focus to be able to 8 table, and make the same reads as you could playing just 4 tables. i certainly know a few people who can do it, but for most of us, we just dont have the capacity for it.

[Gelford]

[ QUOTE ]
my general contention is just that it takes a pretty extraordinary level of concentration and focus to be able to 8 table, and make the same reads as you could playing just 4 tables. i certainly know a few people who can do it, but for most of us, we just dont have the capacity for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are absolutely right, but that is no my point in the above. The point is, that many uNL's really can't read, and in this case the benifit of playing a ton of hands outweights forcing yourself to try and read at fewer tables.

I am not argueing that 8 is a good number btw, I 8 tabled sngs, which are different than cash as they are much more robotic. I think that for me the sweetspot is somewhere between 4 and 6 tables. I can 9 table, but then it is more formulaic ABC poker, which at uNL still will net your a profit.

I rant ....


The thing is, that at first you should strive to play a lot of hands and simply do your best ... find that sweetspot, where you play a lot, but where you are not suffering from to much stress. At first this is one table, then it is two ... etc.

The evolution of a pokerplayer comes in stages, at first you learn a starting hand guide of sorts, then you struggle with remembering and following this. ... then it becomes second nature and you start to move on ... all the while your are playing ... you gotta play ... play and play

Then review ... rince and repeat ... but as already stated, I rant /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Marshall28]

all i was saying was that most people lose focus when trying to concentrate on so many things at once, hence its not beneficial to try to do it while playing a grip of tables.

[Check_The_Nuts]

wtf this thread wins title for best hijack.

[Sean Fraley]

The issue with playing a large number of tables as a method of learning to get solid reads is that it ignores a very basic concept about the human learning process:

All mental processes are limited by the neurological structure of the brain.

This is illustrated in the entirety of the learning process in both physical and mental actions. Poker involves a great deal of very complex thought processes, and gaining a functional grasp of them requires a great deal of practice combined with review and analysis to ensure that the conclusions reached regarding every decision are in fact correct. As with all complex mental actions this requires careful and steady repitition in order to reinforce the neural pathways that are used in the thought process. As the pathways increase in number, the person finds themselves able to accomplish the same mental process with less stress in a shorter amount of time. After this proficiency at a certain level is achieved, it creates a sort of neurological resource framework that can be used a building block for the learning of even more complex thought.

The problem with playing a large amount of tables from the very beginning is that it forces the new player to make these decisions faster than their brain is currently equipped to do so. Therefore they ignore details, skip steps in the information evaluation process, and fail to develop the neural structure that is necessary for a solid skill set. Instead of slowly and systematically developing the complete neurological base for the decision making process of poker and exercising it in order to increase speed and facility, they develop an inferior and crippled neurological structure devoted to rapid action instead of comprehensive data analysis.

[DWarrior]

[ QUOTE ]
The issue with playing a large number of tables as a method of learning to get solid reads is that it ignores a very basic concept about the human learning process:

All mental processes are limited by the neurological structure of the brain.

This is illustrated in the entirety of the learning process in both physical and mental actions. Poker involves a great deal of very complex thought processes, and gaining a functional grasp of them requires a great deal of practice combined with review and analysis to ensure that the conclusions reached regarding every decision are in fact correct. As with all complex mental actions this requires careful and steady repitition in order to reinforce the neural pathways that are used in the thought process. As the pathways increase in number, the person finds themselves able to accomplish the same mental process with less stress in a shorter amount of time. After this proficiency at a certain level is achieved, it creates a sort of neurological resource framework that can be used a building block for the learning of even more complex thought.

The problem with playing a large amount of tables from the very beginning is that it forces the new player to make these decisions faster than their brain is currently equipped to do so. Therefore they ignore details, skip steps in the information evaluation process, and fail to develop the neural structure that is necessary for a solid skill set. Instead of slowly and systematically developing the complete neurological base for the decision making process of poker and exercising it in order to increase speed and facility, they develop an inferior and crippled neurological structure devoted to rapid action instead of comprehensive data analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.lifedenied.com/respek.jpg